| Show I WANTED AN I City Attorney Dislikes to Have Dehls Statement Go Unchallenged MATTER IS DROPPED THOUGH Court AMI ds Ite cs That Xu Xe Formal Him Ju I lit I la iii mill 1111 tutu Denial lcd Motion for lor Probing A slight alight sensation stirred tho tim police poleo court this morning when City CI Ally Al Ati H 11 HJ I J asKed the court to 10 Gate the thu nt 1111 by b Atty Att 1 C Cu Cu u Aj Lust liui la t in itt tilts case caso cala of ot jive u u 16 i lion hunt t been b on that If It Iho rhO ho her tier counsel anu do lo what Ihal stile ne was waa 11 tutU told to 10 Jo do I fur tor u a week we k boo thu against tier liar would wOt bo tic Il dropped tillS aim sue could conduct tier her business unmolested led In Inthe IntIle tIle the Ih future After ner an argument In which the th city attorney the tho court und uld Atty Aty 1011 took look part the Ihl court dented denied the request of ot the tho city Il attorney Ilor OH as I ney 11 tIe ridiculous characterizing the tho whole holl affair Deo lieo 10 charged charle with wih having maintaining a a house of lt was wie to have been boen 1 n tried last Thursday ay On that day ta Mr Diehl representing tho the defendant asked for tor u a 1 continuance stating that ho he had just JUAt been Informed of ot the limo I titTer offer orr of at Immunity lulo to 10 hii hU bin client clem TIme The court grunted the Ih con can continuance until this morning and anti when the case cao wua wu called today City Atty Aty Att Dininny wa waa present with wih hIs Iii motion moton tot for an tin n Investigation Mr I understand that Ihal statements were vere made matle In this thu court the other day that somebody had talked to 10 this defendant and had said ald 10 hi If I she nho ho would discharge hoer her present attorney Diehl and obey ohe the tho directions of or somebody y for tor fora a 1 week she aho would be permitted to 10 continue the she he U in engaged In and und unmolested Now No It appears to 10 me that that matter mater ought to be Investigated by h this thIn court not only on account of at the tho of oC officers officers of ot this thin court aside from your our honor but hut on account nc of ot your our honor yourself because be au o If It persons are aru N brought brou ht In here charged charled with a I crime certainly after the Ih charges are made the tho matter mater In Is In the th hands of o time the Ile court and no one ono can con make any an deal deAf If It I the th statement made Is true Iru I r cannot see sea how ho n a deal of ot that kind could be he made without reflecting upon tho the city ct attorneys office and ns as al I hold that I 1 would like to ask for tor An nn Investigation I think this woman omon lies Bee Barrett should be called Into Inlo court ourt and anti after being sworn wor an DR i z 1 witness made to 10 testify as al to who made macit that statement to 10 her and then truce Crimea the tho thing down I ask uk that Judge Distil either cither re cc retract r tract tho Ihl statement made or that the matter mater be Investigated before your our hon boa honor honor or right now I 1 do not feel that Iha I would be Justified In letting a matter matr of ot that kind go goTHE goTiE TIlE THE TiE COURTS VIEW In reply to City Atty Al Dininny Judge aId ald Tho statement to me was so s ridi ridiculous COleUs culous that I r gave Raf It no thought Had HadIt HadI It I come before the court In the Ih form torm tormo of o an nn affidavit then Ihen I J would certainly have been ben bound to 10 consider It II but It seems to 10 ma mn that such luch conversations as I to 10 In the th statement might occur between behen anyone In the busi buel business bUil ness In which this thin woman In is II presumed to ho he engaged In It Is entirely possible that Ihal any man alan may ma go In and make any sort sOtt of at a statement or assertion There Thero Is nothing trustworthy about the statement Judge DIehl nt at his hi first opportunity suggested to the court that The suggestion of nC the IhA city attorney Is II I absolutely puerile The Tho city attorney ator ney no nl was wal never mentioned In the state statement statement ment ment I nm am frank rank to tl ray Fay that even avon now we do not know kno who ho made the statement promising Immunity but hul I am amer very var er certain ertain crIa In no one would for a n moment think that the city cl attorney or either of ot his ht assistants had the icart part In It remarking City Ct Aty Atty Mie MII Insistent I am Rm free tr to 10 say ny that If I mss Wi this thin court I 1 would sift ft the tho matter to the bottom Time The TI reflection Is II eMI coat upon not only the thom court but hut the tito city el administration tion ton It I should bo be b followed down and If It It I Is II found to tiara have been ren simply ply rn an n Idla Idl statement by b some Irresponsible person mull all al right but bul lets letl find out who made mode tho Iho ho statement As Al It IK Is II now no somebody stands charged with wih Impeding impeding ing n Justice With lh the comment that an Investigation gation loton would lw be 0 In the nature of ot chat chas chasing chO ing In a n rainbow the court suggested Ilg to the city attorney that Inasmuch In as R no specific charge chatIe had hae been el made mad ond that the th whole statement was Wl so fO ridic ridiculous ridiculous ulous on Its Is face that the better way would bo ho to Ignore the tho matter |
